10 Challenges of EU Research Projects …
… and How to Surmount Them
Dr. Martin Spieck
DLR – German Aerospace Center
Hamburg
(text version of presentation)
© 2013 - all rights reserved
by DLR e.V. and Thelsys GmbH
DNW
DLR is Germany's national
research centre for
aeronautics and space.
7400 employees
32 research institutes / scientific institutions
located at
n 8 sites,
 8 locations,
and agencies in
Brussels, Paris, Washington and Tokyo.
Stade 
 Hamburg
 Neustrelitz
 Trauen
Braunschweig n
n Göttingen
ETW n Köln-Porz
n Bonn
 Bad Godesberg
n Lampoldshausen
n Stuttgart
Participation of DLR at:
 European Transonic Wind Tunnel (ETW)
 Deutsch-Niederländische Windkanäle (DNW)
Augsburg 
Weilheim 
n Oberpfaffenhofen
2
Successful projects?
successful
failed
challenged
50%
40%
53%
46%
20%
0%
46%
40%
31%
10%
53%
51%
49%
33%
27%
26% 28%
28%
15%
1996
1998
2000
32%
29%
23%
16%
1994
35%
34%
2002
44%
18%
19%
200
2004
2006
24%
2009
3
Quelle: Standish Group (Boston, MA, USA)
30%
(1) Research projects are special.
• Research = new territory, uncertainty
• Nightmare situation for project managers …
… common reaction: micromanagement
– provides illusion of control
– slows down progress, impairs results
– no other positive effects
• Quality, not quantity
– scientific / technical know-how and experience
essential for reliable assessment of progress
4
(2) There is no „silver bullet“ for proposals.
• A well planned and well written proposal is a
prerequisite, not a guarantor of success
• There is no magic formula,(e.g. consortium or
team composition, must-have trends, buzzwords) - exception: „EC vocabulary“
• A proposal is more than an elaborate project
plan – possible guides for good proposals:
marketing / popular science / business plan
5
(3) A proposal has a target audience of three: the
evaluators.
• The „first impression principle“ also applies for
proposals ( you have app. 30 seconds)
• Evaluators have individual habits to start reading
a proposal
(exec. summary, abstract, 1st chapter, …)
• Make it easy for the evaluator to fill in his
evaluation sheet  evaluation sub-criteria
• Make an educated guess of who is going to
evaluate your proposal
6
(4) Smart project planning aligns individual
agendas with the overall objectives.
• partners have to be committed – not necessarily
to the project, but to their part
• when a proposal is being developed, most
partners do not lay their cards on the table
• your tools: active listening, level of feedback,
joint proposal writing (good test case)
• the higher art of project planning is:
make it altruistic to be egoistic
7
(5) It is not a good idea to focus on everything.
• Most research projects rest on three „pillars“:
methodology, tools, results
• You cannot expect excellent achievements in all
three of these areas
• A project is already excellent if
– it delivers excellent achievements in one area,
– provides „advanced level“ in another area, and
– achieves a pragmatic „average level“ in the third.
8
(6) Efficient management of large projects:
the „project of projects“
• Large projects, i.e budget > 5 M€ or with more
than12 partners, are difficult to handle
• Alternative to expensive management layer:
split project into rel. independent sub-parts
– minimises risk (of complete failure)
– taps „hidden“ management resources (managers with
good technical/scientific know-how)
• requires autonomy for the sub-projects
(= matter of trust)
9
(7) Smart reporting: administrative duties do not
have to be a bureaucratic burden.
• Periodic reports are a management tool
• concentrate on the essential information
• Make it really easy (<30 min.) for the project
team to create periodic reports …
• … but enforce reasonale reporting (meeting
deadlines, proper facts)
• It all starts with good prior planning
• Rule of thumb:
12 reports per project / min. 3 per year
10
(8) The purpose of a meeting is not to meet, it is
to work.
• „7P“ (proper pre-meeting planning prevents poor
performance)
• Distribute „status info“ (e.g. results) one week prior to
the meeting …
• … and ensure that participants have digested them
• Follow-up on action items briefly (!) at the beginning
• Have at least half of meeting devoted to constructive
and/or collaborative issues
• Don‘t waste the opportunity when everyone is at the
table: solve problems, plan ahead, get things done!
11
(9) Always keep your officer informed.
• Your EC project officer is on your side:
Your success is also his/her success
• Sell your project, but sell it honestly
(the good, the bad, the ugly)
• A P.O. who feels deceived, out-of-the-loop or
twitted will cover his/her back. Bad for you!
• Accept individual preferences or „spleens“
• You are the PoC of your project – do not accept
„bypathing“ from partners
12
(10) Mind the gap!
Traps which migth be fatal for your project…
Scope creep
„Is it O.K. to add just some features?“
Lip service support
Working hard to be hardly working …
Exit of stakeholders
„This number is temporarily unavailable.“
Loss of key personnel
„Jack is no longer working here,
but Joe has seen once how to do it …“
Political / dark agendas
… when failing is ultimate success.
13